- Nov 2010
But to Roman-type writers everything was an anihilation. They said the Visigoths were decimated out at Vouille, the Alans and Silingian Vandals earlier wiped out by the Visigoths/Romans and the Suevos wiped out by Leovigildo. In each case it just meant that the leadership/king was killed and they had to amalgamate with somebody else, there were no genocides in these cases.Not if you take ancient texts at face value... Battles of anhilation are not uncommon (e.g. Cannae or in fact many battles of the second punic war such as trasimene where 50%+ are reported dead on the roman side, or trebia 70%+ or Zama 50%+ on the carthaginian side, or Ilipa again 70%+ on the carthaginian side).... Also, the loser would typically leave the battlefield (and often times run away) so only the winners could afford proper burial for their dead, and presumably would not care much about fallen ennemies....
Sounds better if our good old boys wiped out the opposition though eh? Roman bias clouds a lot of our surviving texts from the 4th, 5th, 6th centuries
As well as Stanilic's point about wide area, a lot of battles were a lot less epic than claimed it seems to me. Silly numbers are bandied about from times when no one could count